9:07 p.m.
I feel kinda stupid for asking this, but I couldnt find a simple
explination, and searching through the list archives didn't help. Is
there any particular reason why kernel-sourcecode is missing from the
testing tree? It doesnt appear to be in the in Test2 or Test3 either.
Just curious if this was missed, or if it is on purpose.
Regards,
Rick Stout
9:11 p.m.
On Sun, Oct 31, 2004 at 07:07:22PM -0800, Rick Stout wrote:
I feel kinda stupid for asking this, but I couldnt find a simple
explination, and searching through the list archives didn't help. Is
there any particular reason why kernel-sourcecode is missing from the
testing tree? It doesnt appear to be in the in Test2 or Test3 either.
Just curious if this was missed, or if it is on purpose.
Regards,
Rick Stout
You need to download the .src.rpm for the kernel and generate it.
--
G.Wolfe Woodbury `- -'
RHCT U
The Line Eater is a boojum!
11:44 p.m.
On Sun, 2004-10-31 at 22:11 -0500, Gregory Woodbury wrote:
On Sun, Oct 31, 2004 at 07:07:22PM -0800, Rick Stout wrote:
> I feel kinda stupid for asking this, but I couldnt find a simple
> explination, and searching through the list archives didn't help. Is
> there any particular reason why kernel-sourcecode is missing from the
> testing tree? It doesnt appear to be in the in Test2 or Test3 either.
> Just curious if this was missed, or if it is on purpose.
You need to download the .src.rpm for the kernel and generate it.
It appears to me that there should be some sort of a comment about this
somewhere.
IT should include the following:
* A statement that tells the user most things will compile without
needed to install the kernel-sourcecode now. (This is why it was an
issue for me, and remained an issue until someone told me I no longer
needed it).
* A link to, or instructions on how to extract and prepare the source
from the .src.rpm file.
This question has been asked over and over, and while I'm now aware that
you probably don't need the source code, and that if you do you can get
it from the src.rpm file, I couldn't tell you how to extract it in such
a way as it is as you might expect.
This should definitely be included in the RELEASE NOTES.
IMHO,
Roddd
--
From the pain come the dream
From the dream come the vision
From the vision come the people
From the people come the power
From this power come the change
- Peter Gabriel
12:08 a.m.
On Mon, 2004-11-01 at 00:44, Rodd Clarkson wrote:
[snip]
It appears to me that there should be some sort of a comment about
this
somewhere.
Agreed. I haven't checked, but I'll take your word for it that it's
not in the current release notes.
IT should include the following:
* A statement that tells the user most things will compile without
needed to install the kernel-sourcecode now. (This is why it was an
issue for me, and remained an issue until someone told me I no longer
needed it).
* A link to, or instructions on how to extract and prepare the source
from the .src.rpm file.
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=130754 for
more info. Hopefully, it will be 'ready enough' for the release of FC3
to reference in the release notes.
--
-Paul Iadonisi
Senior System Administrator
Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist
Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux.
GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets
1:15 a.m.
On Mon, 1 Nov 2004, Paul Iadonisi wrote:
On Mon, 2004-11-01 at 00:44, Rodd Clarkson wrote:
[snip]
> It appears to me that there should be some sort of a comment about this
> somewhere.
Agreed. I haven't checked, but I'll take your word for it that it's
not in the current release notes.
It is already documented in current release notes:
---
o In order to eliminate the redundancy inherent in providing a
separate
package for the kernel source code when that source code already
exists in the kernel's .src.rpm file, Fedora Core 3 no longer
includes
the kernel-source package. Users that require access to the kernel
sources can find them in the kernel .src.rpm file. To create an
exploded source tree from this file, perform the following steps
(note
that <version> refers to the version specification for your
currently-running kernel):
[snip]
---
- Panu -
2:02 p.m.
Paul Iadonisi wrote:
On Mon, 2004-11-01 at 00:44, Rodd Clarkson wrote:
[snip]
>It appears to me that there should be some sort of a comment about this
>somewhere.
>
>
Agreed. I haven't checked, but I'll take your word for it that it's
not in the current release notes.
>IT should include the following:
>
>* A statement that tells the user most things will compile without
>needed to install the kernel-sourcecode now. (This is why it was an
>issue for me, and remained an issue until someone told me I no longer
>needed it).
>
>* A link to, or instructions on how to extract and prepare the source
>from the .src.rpm file.
>
>
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=130754 for
more info. Hopefully, it will be 'ready enough' for the release of FC3
to reference in the release notes.
The above mentioned document does a good job. Its nice and easy explained.
Unfortunatly the way of building the kernel is pretty strange/confusing
and the installing of the kernel (using rpm) took quite some time to
finish (around 5min which is way more than copying the files to the
/boot dir and modify grub.conf). Maybe rpm is doing some dependency
checking before installing the files(maybe it could be switch off to
improve install time). If you are tweaking the kernel the turnaround
time for compiling, installing and reboot is much slower than with
standard kernel tar ball. A major setback in my mind.
Another thing I have had quite some problems building a new working
kernel based on the souce code (v. 2.6.9-1.643). Everytime I try to run
it I get Kernel Panic - Not Syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on
unknown-block(0,0) (ext2,ext3 is included). I build a similar kernel
under Redhat 7.3 (same computer but kernel tar ball 2.6.9 from
kernel.org) and there I did not have any problems making the kernel
work. Well if someone have had the same problem and could help me solve
the problem I would be greatfull.
Thanks
JanB
3:14 p.m.
On Mon, 2004-11-01 at 21:02 +0100, Jan Brond wrote:
The above mentioned document does a good job. Its nice and easy
explained.
Unfortunatly the way of building the kernel is pretty strange/confusing
and the installing of the kernel (using rpm) took quite some time to
finish (around 5min which is way more than copying the files to the
/boot dir and modify grub.conf). Maybe rpm is doing some dependency
checking before installing the files(maybe it could be switch off to
improve install time). If you are tweaking the kernel the turnaround
The %install/%post do a lot of hardlinking of files too, I forget
exactly where, probably in /lib and whatnot.
Dan
6:26 a.m.
On Mon, 2004-11-01 at 00:44, Rodd Clarkson wrote:
On Sun, 2004-10-31 at 22:11 -0500, Gregory Woodbury wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 31, 2004 at 07:07:22PM -0800, Rick Stout wrote:
> > I feel kinda stupid for asking this, but I couldnt find a simple
> > explination, and searching through the list archives didn't help. Is
> > there any particular reason why kernel-sourcecode is missing from the
> > testing tree? It doesnt appear to be in the in Test2 or Test3 either.
> > Just curious if this was missed, or if it is on purpose.
> You need to download the .src.rpm for the kernel and generate it.
It appears to me that there should be some sort of a comment about this
somewhere.
Information about how to find the kernel source code should be included
in the welcome message for fedora-devel :)
Philip
7117
days inactive
7117
days old
7 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Dan Williams -
G.Wolfe Woodbury -
Jan Brond -
Panu Matilainen -
Paul Iadonisi -
Philip Balister -
Rick Stout -
Rodd Clarkson